Search results

This chapter discusses the use of law and legal institutions by the emerging social movement seeking to end Australia’s policy of mandatory detention for refugees and asylum seekers. Through an examination of Australian inquiries and court cases alongside social campaigns, it considers the ability of legal institutional responses to identify the harms, in particular state and institutional responsibility, and the subsequent impact of these legal processes in inhibiting and promoting social and structural change. It shows how social movements are harnessing law and creating new legal and civic spaces in which to contest Australia’s refugee and asylum seeker regime.

This paper argues that the nation's immigration laws are being misused to craft a system of preventive administrative detention of immigrant men, predominantly of Middle Eastern background. These detentions give rise to imprisonment without charge for weeks and months, denial of access to lawyers, physical and psychological abuse and ultimately deportations without a fair initial hearing or the exhaustion of available appellate recourse. I argue that this expanded use of civil immigration detention is designed to weaken constitutional due process protections, bringing into the U.S. detention tactics adopted abroad under the rubric of the war on terror. This paper also highlights similarities between the evolving administrative detention system in the United States and longer-standing practices in Israel.

This study aims to compare the impact of Australian onshore and offshore immigration detention centres (IDCs) on detainees’ health and health-care events.

It uses data extracted from the Australian Government’s quarterly health reports from 2014 to 2017. These reports contain a range of data about the health and well-being of detainees, including complaints/presenting symptoms and number of appointments and hospitalisations. To compare onshore and offshore data sets, the authors calculated the rate of health events per quarter against the estimated quarterly onshore and offshore detention population. They ran a series of two-proportion z-tests for each matched quarter to calculate median z- and p-values for all quarters. These were used as an indicator as to whether the observed differences between onshore and offshore events were statistically significant.

The results suggest that adults detained onshore and offshore have substantial health needs, however, almost all rates were far higher in offshore detention, with people more likely to raise a health-related complaint, access health services and be prescribed medications, often at two to three times the rate of those onshore.

This paper adds to a modest body of literature that explains the health of people detained in Australian IDCs. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper to explore health service utilisation and a range of other variables found in the Australian Government’s quarterly health reports. These findings bolster the evidence which suggests that detention, and particularly offshore detention is particularly harmful to health.

Following in the footsteps of critics of the 1920s and 1930s, Caleb Foote's 1954 study of the bail system in Philadelphia set the agenda for bail reform in the United States focusing on judicial discretion and the inequities of a predominantly financially based pretrial detention system. This article argues that the bail reform movement originating in the 1960s fell short of its objectives in its failure to engage judges in the business of reform. From Foote's study on, Philadelphia has played a role historically in studies of bail, detention, and reform. The article considers the experience of Philadelphia's judicial pretrial release guidelines innovation from the 1980s to the present and its implications as an important contemporary bail reform strategy in addressing the problems of bail, release, and detention practices. The implications of the judge-centered pretrial release guidelines strategy for addressing pretrial release problems in urban state court systems are discussed in light of the original aims and issues of early bail reform.

The purpose of this study is to highlight some long-term positive trends in youth detention in New South Wales (NSW) (Australia).

This paper is based on a review of major inquiries into youth detention in NSW over the last 40 years and analysis of recently published youth custody statistics.

There have been a number of positive long-term trends in youth detention in NSW, including a significant reduction in the number of young people held in custody, including the number (as opposed to the proportion) of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people; the total number of youth custody beds has fallen, and there has been a significant positive change in the physical accommodation provided to young people in youth detention, with new facilities replacing unsuitable former centres; and no young person has died in custody (though there was the tragic death of an assistant teaching instructor in 1999) since 1990. These significant positive long-term trends are often lost in the criticisms levelled at the youth justice system.

This paper highlights a series of positive developments that have generally received little or no attention in the extant literature. Australia, as with other jurisdictions, has had a series of damning reviews of youth detention in recent years. While the issues raised in these reviews and inquiries are important and should necessarily be addressed, it is equally important to acknowledge significant positive trends.

The purpose of this paper was to conduct a legal realist assessment of women’s situation in European immigration detention which focuses on relevant international and European human rights instruments applicable to conditions and health rights in detention settings, academic literature and relevant European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence since 2010.

In spite of the United Nations human rights frameworks and European Union (EU) standards, conditions in European immigration detention settings continue to pose a health risk to those detained. Migrant health rights when detained are intertwined with the right not to be subjected to arbitrary detention, detention in conditions compatible for respect for human dignity and right to medical assistance. Migrant women are particularly vulnerable requiring special consideration (pregnant and lactating women; single women travelling alone or with children; adolescent girls; early-married children, including with newborn infants) in immigration detention settings.

The situation of women in immigration detention is patchy in EU policy, academic literature and ECtHR jurisprudence. Where referred to, they are at best confined to their positionality as pregnant women or as mothers, with their unique gendered health needs ill-resourced. ECtHR jurisprudence is largely from male applicants. Where women are applicants, cases centre on dire conditions of detention, extreme vulnerability of children accompanying their mother and arbitrary or unlawful detention of these women (with child).

Concerns have been raised by the European Parliament around immigration detention of women including those travelling with their children. There is a continued failure to maintain minimum and equivalent standards of care for women in European immigration detention settings.

Indefinite immigration detention causes well-documented harms to mental health, and international condemnation and resistance leave it undisrupted. Health care is non-independent from immigration control, compromising clinical ethics. Attempts to establish protected, independent clinical review and subvert the system via advocacy and political engagement have had limited success.

The purpose of this study is to examine the following: how indefinite detention for deterrence (exemplified by Australia) injures asylum-seekers; how international legal authorities confirm Australia’s cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment; how detention compromises health-care ethics and hurts health professionals; to weigh arguments for and against boycotting immigration detention; and to discover how health professionals might address these harms, achieving significant change.

Secondary data analyses and ethical argumentation were employed.

Australian Governments fully understand and accept policy-based injuries. They purposefully dispense cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and intend suffering that causes measurable harms for arriving asylum-seekers exercising their right under Australian law. Health professionals are ethically conflicted, not wanting to abandon patients yet constrained. Indefinite detention prevents them from alleviating sufferings and invites collusion, potentially strengthening harms; thwarts scientific inquiry and evidence-based interventions; and endangers their health whether they resist, leave or remain. Governments have primary responsibility for detained asylum-seekers’ health care. Health professional organisations should negotiate the minimum requirements for their members’ participation to ensure independence, and prevent conflicts of interest and inadvertent collaboration with and enabling systemic harms.

Australia’s aggressive approach may become normalised, without its illegality being determined. Health professional colleges uniting over conditions of participation would foreground ethics and pressure governments internationally over this contagious and inexcusable policy.

The purpose of this study is to fill the gap and apply a fault tree analysis (FTA) in detention lists of Black Sea Region published port state reports from 2005 to 2016. The study analyzes valid records of 2,653 detained ships with 6,374 deficiencies based on a strategic management approach. This paper sets up FTA technique to assess the detention probability of a random ship which calls the Black Sea Region with the help of detention lists published within subject years.

This paper is not published elsewhere, and it is based on an original work, which figures out detention probability of a regular ship at Black Sea Region port state control from published lists of Black Sea Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). By utilizing these detention lists, a generic fault tree diagram is drawn. Those probabilities could be used strategically with the most seen deficiencies in the region which all could guide the users, rule makers and the controllers of the maritime system.

FTA has conducted based on the data which was collected from website of BS MoU detention lists that published from 2005 to 2016. Those lists have been published on monthly basis from 2011 to 2016 and on quarterly basis from 2005 to 2010. Proper detention records have been included into the research, whereas some missing records were excluded. Subject lists have been harmonized and rearranged according to Black Sea MoU Detention Codes which was published on October 2017 at Black Sea MoU’s website. According to BS MoU Annual Reports, 58,620 ships were inspected from 2005 to 2016 as seen in Table 1. Those ships were inspected by each member country’s PSOs in the light and guidance of predefined selection criteria of the region. Detention frequency of inspected ships detected as 0.103116 which explains any ship that called any port in the Black Sea Region could be 10% detained after inspected by PSO. Also, each intermediate event-calculated frequency enlightens the probabilities of nonconformities of ships. Although those deficiencies show structural safety and security nonconformities, those probabilities also prove us that management side of the ships are not enough to manage and apply a safety culture. By the light of that, ship owners/managers could see the general nonconformities according to regional records and could manage their fleet and each ship as per those necessities.

In the light of the above analysis, the future research on this subject could be studied on other regions which might enable a benchmark opportunity to users. Also, insurance underwriters have their own reports and publications that could clarify different points of view for merchant mariners and regulators. In this research, FTA is used as a main method to figure out the root causes of the detentions. For future researches, different qualitative and quantitative methods could be used under the direction of subjects.

Detention frequency of inspected ships detected as 0.103116 which explains any ship that called any port in the Black Sea Region could be 10% detained after inspected by PSO. Also, each intermediate event-calculated frequency enlightens the probabilities of nonconformities of ships. Although those deficiencies show structural safety and security nonconformities, those probabilities also prove us that management side of the ships are not enough to manage and apply safety culture. By the light of that, ship owners/managers could see the general nonconformities according to regional records and could manage their fleet and each ship as per those necessities.

With the nature of carriage, shipping business carry out its essential economic attendance in world trade system via inclusion in national and international transportation. As a catalyst in international trade, shipping itself enables time, place and economic benefits to users (Bosneagu, Coca and Sorescu, 2015). Social and institutional pressures generate shipping industry as one of the most regulated global industries which creates high complexity. Industry evolved to multi-directional structure ranges from international conventions (IMO and ILO) to “supra-national interferences” (EU directives), to regional guidance (MoUs) to national laws (flag states). Ship operators endeavor to adopt/fit its industry environment where rules are obvious. With adaptation of industrial environment, ship operators are able to create an important core competency.

This study enlightens the most recorded deficiencies and analyzed them with the help of fault three method. These calculated frequencies/probabilities show the most seen nonconformities and the root causes of detentions in the Black Sea Region in which those results will be benefited strategically that enables a holistic point of view that guide the owners/managers, charterers/sellers/shippers, classification societies, marine insurance underwriters, ship investors, third parties, rule makers and the controllers of the system to apply safety culture.

Liberal democratic states have involved the use of private companies for purposes of detention and the debate is whether such involvement is only for immigration control or whether they are primarily for macro-economic benefits. This paper aims to present the argument that a State wishing to detain migrants must do so within the purview of immigration control and in conformity to international human rights standards rather than other latent reasons such as macro-economic benefits. The exponential growths of immigration detention over the years, this paper argues, smack of latent reasons with unarguably macro-economic benefits accruing to these States.

The methodology is doctrinal research focusing on immigration detention and privatization. Doctrinal research is library-based and reliance will be placed on primary and secondary materials such as legislations, case laws, soft laws on the one hand and textbooks, journals, articles, legal encyclopedia, databases and many valuable websites on the other hand.

Findings have been made of similarities in State practice between the UK, the USA and Australia and conclude that the trend is worrying given that privatization of the detention estate lends credence to the fact that growing international prison industry influences prison and detention policies.

These have portent implications for the violations of the rights of detainees and weaken the protection of rights under international human rights law.

The originality of this paper lies in its ability to unravel the legitimacy of immigration detention in the face of privatization and macro-economic benefits accruing to States, thereby querying the availability of the rights of migrants within the remit of State practice.

Existing quantitative research demonstrates negatively impacted mental health outcomes for people detained in immigration removal centres (IRCs) in the UK. However, there is limited qualitative research on the phenomenology of life inside UK IRCs. The purpose of this paper is to explore the psychosocial stressors experienced by people in detention, the psychological impacts of being detained and the ways in which people express resilience and cope in detention.

In-depth interviews were conducted with nine people who had previously been held in UK IRCs. Interview transcripts were analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis.

Participants experienced incredulity and cognitive dissonance at being detained, and found themselves deprived of communication and healthcare needs. These stressors led participants to feel powerless, doubt themselves and their worldviews, and ruminate about their uncertain futures. However, participants also demonstrated resilience, and used proactive behaviours, spirituality and personal relationships to cope in detention. Antonovsky’s (1979) theory on wellbeing – sense of coherence – was found to have particular explanatory value for these findings.

The sample of participants used in this study was skewed towards male, Iranian asylum seekers, and the findings therefore may have less applicability to the experiences of females, ex-prisoners and people from different geographical and cultural backgrounds.

This study offers a range of new insights into how detention in the UK impacts on people’s lives. The findings may be useful to policy makers who legislate on and regulate the UK immigration detention system, as well as custodial staff and health and social care practitioners working in IRCs.